Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

The SANDF is shaken: Now is the time to revisit its mandate and means

10 February 2025 Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Prof Theo Neethling, Department of Political Studies and Governance, University of the Free State.

In recent days, 14 South African soldiers have died in clashes with the Rwandan-backed M23 rebels in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Several analysts argue that this marks a low point for the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) and that it is almost too late to implement the reforms needed to restore the military to an institution South Africans can once again take pride in. The incident recalls the so-called Battle of Bangui in March 2013 during the Central African Republic civil war — a major defeat for the SANDF that led to the Séléka rebels seizing control of the country.

This article aims to shed light on the challenges facing the South African military.

Following the historic transition of 1994, South Africa’s foreign policy shifted from a stance of conflict with its neighbours to one centred on regional relations built on the principles of common destiny, friendship, cooperation, and conflict resolution. The South African government sought to take on a leadership role on the continent, creating new opportunities for the SANDF as a military instrument.

Towards the end of the Mandela presidency, South Africa’s involvement in peace and security operations became a defining feature of its post-1994 foreign policy. The government demonstrated its firm commitment to regional stability by deploying the SANDF in peacekeeping operations — first in Lesotho in 1998, followed by the DRC in 1999 and Burundi in 2001.

Dwindling defence budget

However, since 1998 it became evident that the SANDF found it increasingly difficult to conduct operations as a declining budget started to constrain the SANDF. This is linked to the fact that between 1995 and 1998, the defence budget was cut by 11.1%, which eventually resulted in a growing mismatch between policy intent and execution. As a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) South African defence spending had been reduced to less than 3% in the mid-1990s, which boiled down to less than 10% of total government spending. The defence budget then further decreased to 1.54% of GDP in 2004/05 and levelled out in 2014/15 at around 1.2% to 1.1% of GDP.

Despite a dwindling defence budget, the government increasingly expected the SANDF to support the SAPS as murder and death rates rose to levels comparable to — or in some cases even exceeding — those in high-intensity war zones internationally. This has placed the SANDF in an almost impossible position, forced to balance its demanding regional deployments with ongoing appeals from politicians and the public to intervene in crime-ridden hotspots where the SAPS is unable to fulfil its constitutional duty to protect South Africans.

Given these constraints and the changing global and regional geopolitical landscape in which the SANDF operated, the government appointed a task team to draft a second defence review, following the South African Defence Review of 1998, which was finally published as the 2015 South African Defence Review. The task team made it clear that the decrease in funding levels was highly problematic, and that inadequate funding would eventually severely compromise the defence capabilities of the SANDF. They emphasised that the government had to decide on one of two options: approving a greater budget allocation to the SANDF or alternatively opting for a significantly scaled-down level of ambition and commitment which is aligned to the budget allocation. One thing was clear: South Africa’s spending was low in terms of comparative international military spending practice. Since 2015 defence spending in South Africa has declined even further to about 0.7% of GDP, which is way below the international norm of more or less 2% of GDP.

Despite its budgetary challenges, in 2023, the SANDF was the fifth largest troop-contributing nation in the UN’s operation in the eastern DRC and played a key role in the SADC operation against insurgents in northern Mozambique from 2021 to 2024. However, considering the history of SANDF operations, a major problem is that the SANDF’s deployments tend to be open-ended, resulting in protracted deployments with serious implications for the defence budget. Moreover, there is no plan to either opt for an adequate defence budget on the one hand, or to scale down the level of political ambition on the other.

It should also be noted that border protection and support for the South African Police Service (SAPS) in internal operations have become increasingly important and demanding in the SANDF’s activities and responsibilities and can even be regarded as among its primary functions. However, a major concern is that the SANDF is too often used as a stopgap in South Africa’s domestic security landscape — hindering its ability to function as a professional, well-equipped armed force with a clear mandate.

For instance, in 2023, politicians called on the SANDF to assist in combating violence linked to zama zamas after the government deployed soldiers in large numbers to curb illegal mining activities. Even local communities expect the government to utilise the SANDF internally, adding pressure on the state to consider such deployments. In this context, the SANDF has little choice but to respond to political calls to assist the SAPS in maintaining internal security. Another recent example of internal deployment was the government’s decision in 2023 to deploy the SANDF to safeguard the coal power plants of South Africa’s major power utility, Eskom.

In conclusion, it should be clear from the above that there is a significant mismatch between what is expected of the SANDF at the political level and its budget and capabilities. The challenge for the SANDF is that defence remains central to its raison d’être, yet it must also be ready to respond to political calls for assistance in peace and security operations across the continent. Additionally, the SANDF is expected to support the SAPS in providing security services in a crime-ridden and fragile South African society — all while operating on a budget of approximately 0.7% of the country’s GDP. It is therefore no surprise that the SANDF is often described as institutionally overstretched and has, in fact, been in a state of ongoing decline for some time.

Critics can rightly argue that the South African government has shown little to no political will to address the SANDF’s financial challenges over the past two decades, contributing to the difficulties its members face in defending themselves against the M23 rebels in the DRC. At the same time, growing fiscal pressures and severe socio-economic challenges leave the government in a weak position to significantly increase the defence budget. Be that as it may, the SANDF’s troubles in the DRC mark a low point for the institution. Perhaps now is the time to reassess both its mandate and funding, particularly in light of the persistent gap between political expectations and available resources.

News Archive

Prof Jonathan Jansen bids farewell to Kovsies

2016-08-31

Dear Kovsie staff and students

This is my final message to you all.

I wish to use this opportunity for some brief reflections, share a word of gratitude, and convey a sense of the future for our beloved university.

Since the announcement of my departure, I have had more than a dozen breakfasts with mainly students, but also staff, to offer an opportunity for the final sharing of thoughts and, of course, goodbyes. The most common questions asked at those breakfast sessions were the following, with my responses. I repeat them here, since these might also be of interest or concern to you.

What are your proudest achievements?
Two things. The increase in the academic standard for the UFS, both in terms of admission standards and pass rates, but also in relation to the requirements for appointment and promotion especially of professors. This is important because in a globally competitive world, a university stands or falls by the quality of its degrees. And for this you need the best students and the best professors.

What would you do differently, given another chance?
Nothing. I believe that leadership is about doing the best you can with the cards you are dealt in the circumstances in which you are placed. There is no point in second-guessing past decisions. I have always been ambitious as a leader, knowing that most of my goals would be met, and that some would not. That is normal in large and complex organisations, and so, I do not sit around pondering regrets, only remembering with gratitude the things we could achieve together.

What did you learn?
A lot. I learnt that our students have tremendous capacity for greatness both in their academic pursuits but also in their ability to live, and learn, and love together. I have learnt never to underestimate the capacity of our youth to excel in whatever they do. Sometimes I felt I was more ambitious for our students and staff, than they were for themselves. But I have constantly been surprised by the capacity of young students to rise above bitterness and division, and to make great our campus, country, and continent.

I learnt, again, that the overwhelming majority of our staff and students are good people, respectful of each other, and determined to work together to heal our broken past and build a more just society. And I learnt that it is much more fulfilling to build up than to break down, to embrace than to exclude, and to love than to hate.

Were you frustrated with the pace of transformation?
Sometimes, yes. But fortunately I studied educational organisations all my life, mainly schools and universities. Universities are called institutions for a reason, and on century-old sites like the historic Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State, there are core beliefs, values, and practices deeply ingrained in the culture of the place.

Anyone, therefore, who believes that transformation is easy, has obviously never tried to change an old university. It is difficult. You will get blowback. You will get bad press. You will, sadly, lose the support of some people. Some believe the university is changing too fast while others will tell you it is not changing fast enough. As you press for change, you find the university going two steps forward and one step back; in these circumstances, the solemn duty of the leader is simply to ensure that the overall momentum is always forward.

For such a time as this –
a commemorative journey:
2009-2016 (PDF book)

I therefore budget for disappointment even as I relish the many changes we have experienced together over the past seven years. If you want to obtain an objective sense of the scale of the changes at the UFS, ask those students and staff who were here in 2009, not those who came recently. They will tell you that we have a very different university, even though we all acknowledge that there is still some distance to travel. Our remarkable story of change is told in the recent Transformation Audit of the UFS, chaired by Prof Barney Pityana; that Audit Report will be released after it is read and studied by the University Council at its November meeting.

At an individual level, I learnt that most campus citizens change quickly and others more slowly, and that one has a duty to constantly push for change, but also to be patient about change. And I learnt that the ideal change retains the best of our past even as we embrace a more just and inclusive future in which all campus citizens feel that the university truly belongs to each and every one of them.

Are you optimistic about the future of our university?
Yes. The UFS is a very well-managed university thanks to the exceptional talent in the management of our finances, human resources and information technology environments. By the end of 2016, we will have record enrolments, from undergraduates to doctoral students, which is good for our future income. We run a tight ship with regard to the university’s finances, and we have greatly improved the academic standard of our qualifications; in this regard, I am very proud of my senior management team, and the talented middle management personnel, and those who make things work at the coalface of our operations.

I am very concerned, however, about future funding of the 26 public universities and the extremely vulnerable situation of at least 10 higher-education institutions. The economy is not growing and the costs of running a modern university are escalating. The delays in government commission reports on tuition fees do not help, and there seems no urgency ‘higher up’ to make the tough decisions.

We have to ensure free education for the poorest students — that is the position of your senior management – but we also need to guarantee the financial sustainability of our universities. The task of the UFS leadership, in this period of uncertainty, is to manage those two expectations as best we can. But this cannot happen without your assistance, and I do ask that you provide the new Rector and his or her team with the same understanding and support which I have enjoyed from you.

In conclusion
I am grateful.

To the many hundreds of students who have passed through my office and our home, and who sat in my many lectures and engaged me in your residences – thank you for enriching my sense of life and leadership. I am grateful that Grace and I could support and mentor many of you over the years and see you graduate. I am a better leader because of you.

To the staff of the three campuses – there is no university Rector, I can assure you, who enjoyed more love and support than what you offered me since the day I arrived here. Students come and go, but you have been my foundation year after year, and I thank you for that.

To parents, friends, and followers off-campus, in South Africa and abroad – thank you for hundreds of letters, emails, phone calls, prayers and ‘packages of support’ (from biltong to books). In the most difficult times, you rallied from everywhere with a word of support, often on social media. Know this: your words kept me calm in the storm.

Thank you, everyone.

Goodbye.

Prof Jonathan Jansen
Vice-Chancellor and Rector
University of the Free State

Description: Prof Jansen saying goodbey Tags: Prof Jansen saying goodbey

Prof Jonathan Jansen steps down as UFS Vice-Chancellor and Rector (16 May 2016)

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept